From Putin With Love

Maria Alyokhina took this photograph of herself and
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova in the back of a police van

  Vladimir Putin has done it again. Maria Alyokhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, two members of the Russian punk rock band Pussy Riot have been arrested in Sochi. Their crime? Well, in this case, the nefarious deed of walking down a street.


  The two women had planned to shoot a music video for a new song, Putin Will Teach You to Love Your Motherland in a local Church. Given the vast and entirely unwarranted overreaction to the punk collective's now-famous protest at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, it would perhaps not have been much of a surprise if they had been arrested during such an action. But they never made it. Instead, they were picked up by police whilst on their way to the planned protest. They have been accused of robbery, but as yet no charges have been filed. 

  Clearly, though, this accusation is pure nonsense. Perhaps, were the incident isolated, we might be persuaded to reluctantly swallow the official story. But it is not. At least nine people are in police custody for clearly political motives, among them former Italian MP and LGBT rights campaigner Vladimir Luxuria, with an unidentified number of others having been picked up but subsequently released. This assault on the rights and freedoms of both the Russian people and international visitors to the Winter Olympics host city is characteristic of the heavy-handed and oppressive Putin regime, but that the authorities have carried on their campaign of repression when the city is in the full glare of the international spotlight demonstrates both the cavalier ease with which they can carry out such actions and the security Putin feels in his control of the country. It is a fresh reminder, if any were needed, that this is a man and a government willing to do anything to maintain its iron grip.

  But has Putin made a mistake? By re-arresting Alyokhina and Tolokonnikova, so soon after their two-year internment in separate Siberian concentration camps was cut short by the politically-motivated Amnesty Bill last December, huge publicity will surely be drawn to the political skirmishes around Sochi which, thus far, the media has been too blinded by the glittering spectacle of the games themselves to focus on. By making two women who have already been identified as targets of the Putin regime once more into martyrs for the cause, Putin will perhaps find the small but growing number of voices raised against his corrupt leadership become louder. 

  Whilst most Russians have sadly been sufficiently taken in by the conspiracy of Church and State to mutilate their morality that they are ambivalent towards, or even support, the persecution of minorities in their native country, there are enough who refuse to bow to Putin's warped image of the world to cause problems for his administration. The international community, meanwhile, whilst as ever slow to react has - in general - been a supporter both of Pussy Riot and the wider human rights campaign. As this news hits the headlines, perhaps it will start to filter through to the collective world consciousness that the problems in Russia remain as great now as they ever were - and perhaps now, finally, we might start to do something about it.

  One thing is for certain - the neo-fascism of Vladimir Putin and his allies in the Orthodox Church is just as corrupt, just as damaging as the Stalinist perversion of Marxism in the old Soviet Union was. The rest of the world has a duty to respond to the plight of those people trapped by Putin's barbaric, coercive laws into a life of lies and violence and to do our best to rescue them from the clutches of what is, now more than ever, an evil empire.

Where There's Smoke...

  The House of Commons has just passed a resolution allowing the government to impose a blanket ban on smoking in cars containing children. Just to be clear, this emphatically does not mean that a ban has been created - it merely enables the government, at any point in the future, to do so. This is quite likely to occur in the fairly near future, as failure to do so would be highly damaging politically, but as of yet, no. Just to be clear: you may continue to poison your children's lungs for a little while to come. 

  Now, it would be fair to say that I broadly support this move. I do think that children need to be protected from dangerous chemicals, of which tobacco smoke is one, and government's major responsibility is to prevent harm to the citizens of the country which is governs. It is a sad, sad thing that legislation is even necessary in this area - seriously, why the Hell is anyone smoking in front of their kids anyway? - but NHS statistics suggest that 430,000 children are regularly exposed to second-hand smoke in their family cars. So yes, this move was an unfortunate necessity.

  But...

  There's always a but, isn't there? And in this case it's a big one, because this move DOES impinge on civil liberties - there's no question of that. You can argue the toss one way or the other as to whether this particular impingement is justifiable - and as I say, I would consider that it is - but it represents what is a creeping attempt to curtail the freedoms of the people. Now, as a once radical anti-smoker, it will likely come as a shock to many who know me when I say I think the ban on smoking in pubs should be overturned. I agree that in restaurants, shops etc. it is reasonable but pubs are traditionally places where people go for their leisure time - and if they want to smoke, why legislate to stop them? There might be those who don't wish to breath in the smoke, of course, but it would be a fairly simple matter to put a screen of some kind up to create a smoking area if a pub wants to attract both smokers and non-smokers. In any case, this kind of decision should rest with the landlord - not the government.

  The reason I support the new move is because the protection of children has to be legally enforced. Simply put, children should not be exposed to dangerous chemicals until they are old enough to take that decision for themselves. Adults, though, should be free to do what they wish provided it does not cause undue harm to non-consenting persons. So yes, legalise marijuana. Yes, allow smoking in designated smokers' pubs. Yes, allow people to continue gorging themselves on fast food if that is their choice. If health problems result from this, then they should be made to pick up the tab, but it is firmly not government's job to tell adults what they can and can't do in situations where it hurts no-one else. Civil liberties are important, and we must begin the process of clawing them back from the state.

  Otherwise, when they come for the really important ones - freedom of expression, assembly, religion etc. - we'll be so used to it no-one will think twice.

Where Have All the Rockers Gone?

  Check the BBC's official charts. Go on. I dare you.

  Depressing, isn't it? When the most rock 'n' roll track in the Top 40 is by Imagine Dragons, of all people, you know something is deeply, deeply wrong. Radio stations consistently ignore rock music in favour of the latest teenage pop ballads, hip-hop of a standard that would make MCA turn in his grave and that most terrible of all noises - I won't call  it music - DUBSTEP.......

  Oh dear....

  That being the case, your average listener could be forgiven for thinking that rock 'n' roll was, indeed, dead - or at the very least, on its way out. Nothing, though, could be further from the truth. One only has to look at the Top 40 albums chart to see that the odd rock band is still managing serious commercial success. British pop punks You Me At Six have claimed the top spot with their latest offering, Cavalier Youth, and other rock artists are scattered down the length of the list. This is all well and good - but where's the airplay? Non-existent, for the most part - unless, like me, you only listen to Planet Rock and the occasional lapse into Absolute Radio for those areas where digital cannot be had. We need more of this already-popular rock 'n' roll on the radio - if only to counterbalance the mindless warbling of Taylor Swift and her army of clones.

  And another thing: Where's all the metal gone? Encouraging though the presence of You Me At Six and the Killers in the Top 40 Albums chart is, both bands fall decidedly into the poppier end of the rock spectrum. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course - I'm fond of both bands - but this ignores the legions of hard rock and heavy metal bands out there, many struggling to make a name for themselves. I see Of Mice and Men have managed to creep onto the charts, but that's about your lot - and I was never a fan of theirs anyway, if I'm honest. The popular explosion of Heaven's Basement's Filthy Empire this time last year shows there is a demand for the heavier brands of rock music, but - that phenomenon aside - the presence of such hard rockers is next to nothing on any kind of mainstream radio. Not good enough.

  You might say: Who cares? After all, rockers like myself can just listen to specialist radio stations, and let everyone else get by with their own music. To this I say: No! Simply put, rock music is one of the most powerful forms of expression available to people today - particularly the young. Whilst I'm certainly not going to say that the likes of One Direction don't occasionally strike an emotional chord with their fans, the basic reality is that they are corporate shells, propped up by the massed power of the record companies and with limited actual talent. They've done very well for themselves, and good luck to them, but think about it - in thirty years' time, will anyone know their names? Hell, I don't know them now!

  Rock music is an art form quite unlike any other, and whilst I would not like to say that rock is objectively a better genre than any other (okay, that's a lie - I would like to, but I won't, because music is inherently subjective) it cannot be denied that it has artistic merit at least equivalent to anything else on the radio. So, why is it mysteriously absent? Again, it's that damned massed corporate power behind Rihanna, Justin Bieber, the Black Eyed Peas and the like. The big companies push them, because that kind of music is easy to produce, factory-line style, and distribute to the masses in record  numbers (pun intended). I'm not denying that there is some artistic merit in some chart music, some of the time. I just think we deserve better than the same repackaged, plastic singers with their radio-friendly unit shifters, day in, day out. It doesn't necessarily have to be rock 'n' roll, but a little wouldn't hurt, now would it?

  I will not rest until I see toddlers in Slayer T-Shirts and ten-year-old girls buying Metallica represses on vinyl from HMV. Rock 'n roll will never die!